Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Apple pulls out. So does Disney/ESPN


PanthersATL
 Share

Recommended Posts

Best solution IMO if the NFL is imposing all these restrictions because they are ass backward

 

Satellite is officially dead! Can't wait to cancel for my restaurant in January. Youtube TV is 80 to 90 times better as as service than Direct TV. Gone are the antiquated searching through a long list of text channels to find the game you need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, amcoolio said:

Satellite is officially dead! Can't wait to cancel for my restaurant in January. Youtube TV is 80 to 90 times better as as service than Direct TV. Gone are the antiquated searching through a long list of text channels to find the game you need.

Still no word on how the new plan will work for commercial establishments.  There currently is a limit of three concurrent devices on YouTube streaming accounts, which will likely continue.

While Amazon Prime allows for the Thurs games to be viewed in bars, there has not been an announcement for YouTube yet.

DirecTV has been negotiating separately to maintain the restaurant/bar piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep, this whole process playing out pretty much confirms that the days of satellite and cable TV are numbered. Hell, I haven't had it in years. It's basically going the way of the home phone. You pretty much only have it if you're a boomer and it's all you've ever known.

I haven't had cable TV in a decade.  I dropped satellite TV 3 decades ago. Where have y'all been? I'm over 60 by the way.

  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I haven't had cable TV in a decade.  I dropped satellite TV 3 decades ago. Where have y'all been? I'm over 60 by the way.

I kept satellite in CO because I was so far out in the boonies that my internet speeds were too shoddy to rely on consistent streaming. Dropped it in NC even though I'm still out in the boonies and my speeds still aren't great but as long as I'm not streaming on multiple devices at once it's doable. Still waiting on Elon to quit fuging around with tanking Twitter and get me some damn Starlink. Been on the waiting list for over two years and had the date pushed back three times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I kept satellite in CO because I was so far out in the boonies that my internet speeds were too shoddy to rely on consistent streaming. Dropped it in NC even though I'm still out in the boonies and my speeds still aren't great but as long as I'm not streaming on multiple devices at once it's doable. Still waiting on Elon to quit fuging around with tanking Twitter and get me some damn Starlink. Been on the waiting list for over two years and had the date pushed back three times.

That is the kicker with streaming services.  You need a good internet connection.  That will be the only thing that keeps the cable companies alive.  You need wired connections because wireless just can't deliver the speeds needed for HD streams. Especially in remote areas.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

That is the kicker with streaming services.  You need a good internet connection.  That will be the only thing that keeps the cable companies alive.  You need wired connections because wireless just can't deliver the speeds needed for HD streams. Especially in remote areas.

I'm over a mile off of a public maintained road. Luckily, the people who built this house had a line ran to it but that was in 2011. I'm maxed out at 25mbps but typically see speeds roughly half that. I called to see about upgrading the line and they came out and the guy said it's gonna be a five figure number. Interested? If you are, I'll do the actual measurements and write out a full quote but just spit balling it I'm gonna say probably $15-20k and if you know you aren't gonna do it I'd rather not go through the hassle of doing an actual measurement. Nah man, I'm good. 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep, this whole process playing out pretty much confirms that the days of satellite and cable TV are numbered. Hell, I haven't had it in years. It's basically going the way of the home phone. You pretty much only have it if you're a boomer and it's all you've ever known.

For now.

As we've talked about over multiple months in (Nerdvana?) that other streaming thread, there are discussions in play for the content providers (Disney, Netflix, Paramount+ etc....) teaming up to offer a single streaming package of all their channels together.   

Rumored initial price point is $100/month (depending on the participants, of course).  This would be separate from your Internet connectivity bill.  So you may still be looking at $150-$200/month for your new "cable package".   *shrug*

Happy to continue the non-NFL-related streaming convo over in that other thread so as not to hijack the topic here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I'm over a mile off of a public maintained road. Luckily, the people who built this house had a line ran to it but that was in 2011. I'm maxed out at 25mbps but typically see speeds roughly half that. I called to see about upgrading the line and they came out and the guy said it's gonna be a five figure number. Interested? If you are, I'll do the actual measurements and write out a full quote but just spit balling it I'm gonna say probably $15-20k and if you know you aren't gonna do it I'd rather not go through the hassle of doing an actual measurement. Nah man, I'm good. 😂

Damn!  That sucks. I live in Haywood County and we either pay Charter for the internet service or a wireless service.  I get 200+ mbps easily here but I'm not that far out from the control station even though I live in a rural area.  AT&T is a joke.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Damn!  That sucks. I live in Haywood County and we either pay Charter for the internet service or a wireless service.  I get 200+ mbps easily here but I'm not that far out from the control station even though I live in a rural area.  AT&T is a joke.

I can see one other house from mine and I can only see it when the leaves are off. Behind me to the south is literally just miles of untouched wilderness. 

Screenshot_20221222-151011.thumb.png.0302c8509e6437ddb1042f67e7339d67.png

When I go home I want to be able to forget the rest of the world exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Exactly what I was going to say. Brady seems to be taking a page out of Olsen's playbook, which is probably a good thing. They'll probably get around to giving Brady an Emmy one day, and he should thank Olsen for giving him the blueprint for success.
    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
×
×
  • Create New...